Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Testicular cancer is one of the few solid cancers that can be cured even when it is metastasized with overall survival rate of more than 90%. The aim of this study was to establish the age adjusted incidence of testicular cancer and to critically assess the management of testicular tumor. METHODS: This is a quantitative retrospective study utilizing a review of clinical notes for patients who underwent testicular orchidectomy. The number of cancer cases, types of pathology and cancer staging were examined. RESULTS: There is no substantial difference between the crude and the age-standardized incidence, moreover no difference from the reported crude incidence by the Scottish intercollegiate guidelines. We found 55.1% of seminoma, 14.28% of non-seminoma and 30.61% of combined (seminoma and non-seminoma), and stage I disease in 61.22% of cases, stage II in 36.73% of cases, and stage IV in 2.04% of cases. Most of the cancers were in the age group 20 - 50 with the majority (48.97%) in the age group 31 - 40. About 42.85% of cases were identified with high tumor markers; higher percentage of seminoma at stage II (40.74%). CONCLUSIONS: There is no substantial difference between the crude and the age-standardized incidence, moreover no difference from the reported crude incidence. Most of the cancers were in the age group 20 - 50 with the majority (48.97%) in the age group 31 - 40. Only 25% of seminomas had elevated tumor markers. Moreover, it is important to re-enforce strict adaptation to the IGCCCG prognostic factor-based classifications.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".